A&P ef-s 10-22 VS ef 17-40 L

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Exile10901, Feb 3, 2005.

  1. Exile10901

    Exile10901 Join the OTA today! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2002
    Messages:
    22,390
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SoCal
    anyone own both?

    debating on which one to get, the 17-40 is cheaper, and it is L glass, but the 10-22 is quite a bit wider


    :hsd:
     
  2. MelloBoy

    MelloBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    0
    this for 20D or 300D?
     
  3. Exile10901

    Exile10901 Join the OTA today! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2002
    Messages:
    22,390
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SoCal
  4. sony

    sony Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    112,721
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Hard to compare the lenses since the ranges completely different. What are you going to take pictures of?
     
  5. canonshooter

    canonshooter New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    936
    Likes Received:
    0
    17-40 if you ever plan on moving up to a different camera that doesnt accept ef-s.

    I was in the same situation as you but it was an easier decision considering i still shoot a lot of film, and got the 17-40 since it would also work with my film body.
     
  6. Tomash

    Tomash Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Messages:
    77,754
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    The 10-2 will give you a much wider wideangle.
    11-22 will give you 10mm, while the 17-40 will give you ~27.
     
  7. hash browns

    hash browns lolcathlon champion OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    95,391
    Likes Received:
    85
    Location:
    Manhattan Beach, CA
    :hahano:
     
  8. MelloBoy

    MelloBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    0
    wow
    2mm wide angle :p
     
  9. Exile10901

    Exile10901 Join the OTA today! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2002
    Messages:
    22,390
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SoCal
    :rofl:


    im gonna stick with the 17-40
     
  10. canonshooter

    canonshooter New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    936
    Likes Received:
    0
    10-22 will give you 16-35mm equiv. on a 10d/20d/300d... not 10mm
     
  11. raptor_talon

    raptor_talon Who is the master? Sho'nuff!

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    5,809
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    T.O.
    there isn't very much overlap between them - why not get both?
     
  12. Exile10901

    Exile10901 Join the OTA today! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2002
    Messages:
    22,390
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SoCal
    10-22 + 24-70 2.8L + 70-200 2.8L = win (but very expensive)
     

Share This Page